Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

My posts on this were just to highlight what it seems is a very different approach from what I learnt.

I was always told from the very beginning that it is not a good idea to WANT to become powerful, the more powerful you WANT to be, the enemy does the same. The main purpose of Daito Ryu is to defeat the enemy, not make them stronger.

My teacher always told me, if you think you are powerful go to a good judo/jujutsu dojo, or mma gym and show them how powerful you are. Do you think they will care about your dantien? Aiki should set you free, not make you become obsessed with power. My teacher actually warned me against doing that and told me about people who had done that, and it didn't end too well for them.

The photo you showed of Hisa Sensei, that is him doing Ueshiba Ryu. Ueshiba Sensei changed what he learnt from Takeda Sensei and introduced throwing people away. Hisa Sensei had two clubs in Osaka; the Kansai Aikido Club and the Asahi Dojo. What he taught at the Asahi Dojo was different.

Gavin

The problem we have here is similar to what often happens with discussions about "Aiki" - people make statements based on different definitions of what they are talking about (in this case "power") and, inevitably, end up disagreeing.

FWIW, we have a lot of folks who do quite well in Judo and MMA (for some of our folks it's their primary practice), and don't seem to have been hampered in the least, dantien or no.

The problem we have here is similar to what often happens with discussions about "Aiki" - people make statements based on different definitions of what they are talking about (in this case "power") and, inevitably, end up disagreeing.

This is one of the reasons I have worked (here -- and in my own training and conceptual grasp) to reduce these concepts as much as possible to their objective physical and biomechanical aspects - to remove such pernicious ambiguities of reference in ill-defined terms.

IHTBF is one thing -- but then you still have the problem of wondering how to extend and apply what it is you just "felt" -- or -- even more problematically thought you felt. The problem is that these mechanisms play demonstrable tricks with the (quite severe) lags between conscious neurological perception and voluntary response on the one hand (slow) -- and subliminal neuro-skeleto-muscular cues for reflexive action (order of magnitude faster).

In these settings IHTBF is of less use than what one might commonly assume. Your "feeling" is not normally attuned to track these skewed temporal sequences (and subconscious neuro-mechanical cues) . Without a conceptual grasp of the objective mechanisms one cannot easily judge what is happening because perceived cause and effect are jumbled by the mismatches in timing between each type of these perceptions and their prompted actions -- and their resulting interplay (and exploitation). It is precisely these disruptive features at such a basic physiological level that makes it a superlative addition to any physical martial engagement.

IHTBF is one thing -- but then you still have the problem of wondering how to extend and apply what it is you just "felt" -- or -- even more problematically thought you felt.

But that's exactly what training is engendered to elicit, the ability to extend and apply correct feeling to different tasks. Waza and ki exercises are the tools employed to explore the feelings associated with a coordinated mind and body. Repetitive practice allows one to experiment with how varying degrees of mind/body coordination influences performance.

Quote:

Erick Mead wrote:

The problem is that these mechanisms play demonstrable tricks with the (quite severe) lags between conscious neurological perception and voluntary response on the one hand (slow) -- and subliminal neuro-skeleto-muscular cues for reflexive action (order of magnitude faster).

You haven't stated what the "mechanisms" you mentioned above are, but that is of no matter. Performance that is mind/body driven is neither wholly voluntary or reflexive. Nor is it a simple amalgamation of both. Unfortunately I don't have the terms to state clearly what I'm trying to say, but I know what I feel and that is: performance that arises from a coordinated mind and body is a synergy of both voluntary response and reflexive action whereby the gap separating the two is considerably narrowed.

Quote:

Erick Mead wrote:

Your "feeling" is not normally attuned to track these skewed temporal sequences (and subconscious neuro-mechanical cues) . Without a conceptual grasp of the objective mechanisms one cannot easily judge what is happening because perceived cause and effect are jumbled by the mismatches in timing between each type of these perceptions and their prompted actions -- and their resulting interplay (and exploitation).

As an intellectual exercise I see the value of casting what we are learning in the mold of known, familiar patterns. But for me, and I can speak only for myself, I learn best by doing... and doing again... and again... Each repetition provides feedback that I use to enhance correct feeling and strengthen mind/body coordination.

I do appreciate your analyses Erick, though admittedly a lot of what you post goes over my head and I just don't see how to apply what I do follow to practical training. But you definitely spur my thought processes which drives me to keep looking deeper to broaden my understanding.

My posts on this were just to highlight what it seems is a very different approach from what I learnt.

I was always told from the very beginning that it is not a good idea to WANT to become powerful, the more powerful you WANT to be, the enemy does the same. The main purpose of Daito Ryu is to defeat the enemy, not make them stronger.

My teacher always told me, if you think you are powerful go to a good judo/jujutsu dojo, or mma gym and show them how powerful you are. Do you think they will care about your dantien? Aiki should set you free, not make you become obsessed with power. My teacher actually warned me against doing that and told me about people who had done that, and it didn't end too well for them.

Gavin,

Thank you for revisiting your intentions for contributing to this thread: the additional semantics actually make a big difference! Those seeking to develop "internal power", in particular through the Daito-ryu-based aiki-taiso discussed over the years here, are after the same objective: to not present "power" in a manner that induces the uke/attacker to become stronger. The body skills negate the "ability" (maybe that's a better word for what we're trying to quantify and qualify here) of the attacker while amplifying one's own, and the attacker never feels the normal ramp-up of "power" to meet his/her attack that results in a physical and emotional escalation of the clash.

Now, as for taking one's ability out for a spin against trained fighters, it is certainly smart to not equate one skill (e.g. IP) with another (fighting). That said, the most notable Daito-ryu men saw no problem dispatching fighters via the ability discussed in the preceding paragraph. That is a key reason why the art in its various flavors and flows (including aikido) wasn't relegated to the history books in the former half of the 20th century.

That ability is still demonstrable today, but then as now is extremely rare. For example, many folks have seen the photos of Dan Harden demonstrating Aiki-Age on Scott Burke recently in Hawaii. Why head-butt the guy, or bite is ear -- tactics that could very likely create the escalation you rightly state to avoid -- when you can simply use high-level aiki, if it's in your repertoire (also, imagine that same ability to move a man of Scott's size channeled into a throw or atemi if things don't end there)?

Quote:

Gavin Slater wrote:

The photo you showed of Hisa Sensei, that is him doing Ueshiba Ryu. Ueshiba Sensei changed what he learnt from Takeda Sensei and introduced throwing people away. Hisa Sensei had two clubs in Osaka; the Kansai Aikido Club and the Asahi Dojo. What he taught at the Asahi Dojo was different.

OK, taking that at face value, Ueshiba's contributions to the Asahi lineage are still Daito-ryu (not aikido) canon. There certainly is tactical value in the relatively few Daito-ryu jujutsu throws that aren't designed to go straight down for the usual intended arm and leg strikes to finish off the attacker. Sometimes using the attacker as a projectile (e.g. maybe toward a nearby wall or precipice) is a better game-ender than the ground in a given situation.

I just dont think aiki is something you get more and more of. So when you say high level aiki I get the impression that you think it is something you keep building on?

Yes that is a very impressive photo of Dan Harden doing 'aiki-age'. My teacher never used that term, and he said Hisa Sensei never used that term to him either. I dont think that term exists in Takeda Ryu, but there are really no terms or names. Maybe it is a modern term.

Yes Ueshiba Sensei had a very important contribution to Daito Ryu. Although at the time the students never knew they were learning Daito Ryu. They were just learning Ueshiba's martial art i.e. Ueshiba Ryu, he never told them the name, but he had started to change towards aikido during that time. If you look at the Asahi film that is very different to Takeda Ryu.

When Takeda Sensei arrived he did re-teach alot of the waza in the early books that did throw away waza. I remember my teacher telling me all of the time, in Ueshiba Ryu they did it like this, but Takeda Sensei told them do it differently. The waza were very different there is one in particular in Ueshiba Ryu in the 5th book I think, it was like the throw kaiten nage in aikido, but Takeda Sensei did not like that throw. The version he taught is completely different.

Yes that is a very impressive photo of Dan Harden doing 'aiki-age'. My teacher never used that term, and he said Hisa Sensei never used that term to him either. I dont think that term exists in Takeda Ryu, but there are really no terms or names. Maybe it is a modern term.

Just off of the top of my head - here and here the Takumakai's Hakaru Mori uses the term "aiki-age". Seigo Okamoto used the term, and of course, Sagawa Yukiyoshi also used the term frequently (and he pre-dates Takuma HIsa in Daito-ryu). That's three different lines that really only have Takeda as a common denominator....

I just dont think aiki is something you get more and more of. So when you say high level aiki I get the impression that you think it is something you keep building on?

Yes that is a very impressive photo of Dan Harden doing 'aiki-age'. My teacher never used that term, and he said Hisa Sensei never used that term to him either. I dont think that term exists in Takeda Ryu, but there are really no terms or names. Maybe it is a modern term.

Why wouldn't it be possible to develop a deeper understanding of aiki, just like any other body skill?

I just dont think aiki is something you get more and more of. So when you say high level aiki I get the impression that you think it is something you keep building on?

Yes that is a very impressive photo of Dan Harden doing 'aiki-age'. My teacher never used that term, and he said Hisa Sensei never used that term to him either. I dont think that term exists in Takeda Ryu, but there are really no terms or names. Maybe it is a modern term.

Yes Ueshiba Sensei had a very important contribution to Daito Ryu. Although at the time the students never knew they were learning Daito Ryu. They were just learning Ueshiba's martial art i.e. Ueshiba Ryu, he never told them the name, but he had started to change towards aikido during that time. If you look at the Asahi film that is very different to Takeda Ryu.

When Takeda Sensei arrived he did re-teach alot of the waza in the early books that did throw away waza. I remember my teacher telling me all of the time, in Ueshiba Ryu they did it like this, but Takeda Sensei told them do it differently. The waza were very different there is one in particular in Ueshiba Ryu in the 5th book I think, it was like the throw kaiten nage in aikido, but Takeda Sensei did not like that throw. The version he taught is completely different.

Gavin

Possibly, probably….

In any case I don't see therein any contradiction to what Zoe wrote here:

Quote:

....One of the characteristics of aiki-no-jutsu are of course, aiki as control with no leg or foot power. I was taught that Aiki-no jutsu is the higher level throws. I was also shown that in the Ropokai almost all of the techniques were of the aiki-no-jutsu level (higher level) and lack leg or foot power.

I think we should consider that Ueshiba, like Mori here, and Okomoto of the Ropokai, all decided to use the upper level techniques of the art demonstrating pure aiki as the foundation of their arts.....

In fact, throwing, done by Ueshiba, Hakaru Mori or Okamoto, to the eyes of those who had got the right instruction and were expected to know what to look for, may have been meant to show them one of the purest forms of aiki; this in the context of Budo but largely deprived of any aspect of real fighting.

In order to apply Aiki and execute Aiki techniques, the strength, technical points and other essentials required for joint techniques are not necessary requirements. You could even say that they are an impediment.

In other words, the fundamental principles behind Aiki techniques and joint techniques are completely different, stated extremely one could even say that their technical principles are diametrically opposed. Accordingly, however much one trains in joint techniques, that alone will absolutely not enable one to accomplish Aiki techniques.

It is not "Shuchu-ryoku" ("focused power"), I believe that it is to make the opponent non-resistant upon touch. Extend Ki through the contact point, transmit from the Tanden to the feet and put the opponent in a condition in which they are unable to move. After that, they may be thrown or taken down at will. I was taught by my teacher Toshimi Matsuda "Don't put in power!". One must remember the feel of taking the teacher's hand and then absorb it through their own process of trial and error. In my case it took about thirty years.

In order to grasp Aiki there are those that approach through theory and those that approach through the body. Both of these seek the answer to Aiki, but most of the new schools from the post-war skip past the process and seek the answer through theory. We are different from that, we chose the method of learning Aiki though the process of such things as Kihon-dosa and guided practice, training that uses the body.

Dan and I discussed this just last night regarding weapons. All the same principles are applied. Weapon work just makes it far more obvious.
Power from hara/dantian is used to create stability as mentioned here. It is what Dan calls dynamic stability that has such a profound effect on someone trying to push or pull you and they end up off balanced or having to adjust to retain balance. Since any point of contact has this soft power behind it and requires what feel like- as no effort at all- it tends to neutralize their force it then becomes easy to use aiki (In yo ho) to control in whatever way one wants. Throwing away or throwing down is not aiki, it is what happens after aiki, and is merely a choice that defines various arts approaches.
Zoe

In one of my previous posts, I related a preservative feeling that drives my ukemi. First, I think that you have a cross roads at which you decide whether aiki is about you doing something to someone, or someone doing something because of you. If you understand that you are in physical jeopardy when you partner throws you into the ground, then you have an obligation to escape that jeopardy. I think there is a mis-conception that when you see someone thrown "away" it is because nage projected them in that direction. It's not. It's tiddlywinks. The force is up/down (ten chi). My partner "shoots" out to avoid the pressure. Can nage provide some guidance to the trajectory? Sure. The problem is that most of us cannot generate the vertical power to "shoot" our partner away, so instead we apply a directional force to "project" our partner. The crazy $hi! is that the tiddlywinks works against heaven, not just earth.

I think another cross roads we meet is when we have to cast a marble about what is aiki. I think most of us spend a considerable amount of time without fidelity to a concept of aiki. Right or wrong, I think we deliberately leave aiki as a nebulous concept. Part of my terminology contends that aiki is definite and demonstrable. I believe this because I have felt it and worked with a number of people who can show it, teach it, and transmit it. Part of my terminology contends that aiki is a [perishable] body skill. You condition you body through physical activity and that activity improves the quality and quantity with which to you utilize aiki. I believe this because we have been given a set of exercises and a curriculum that was originally intended to condition this skill.

I began differentiating aiki from aikido because I believe there is no majority definition of aiki in aikido. Its ridiculous to say, but the simple fact is there is no consensus in aikido about what is aiki. The understanding on which I have decided is not even a leading minority definition. This observation is also consistent with the demonstrations and instruction in which I have participated. There is a small minority of instructors who has started showing what they do in a different fashion. I believe these instructors are trying to separate aiki to give it a refined illustration. It didn't seem fair to assimilate the work these individuals did back into the collective aggregate. So, I separated them.

Aiki is not magic. It's not a power bar positioned below your avatar. It's not invisible force that shoots from your hands... I am not sure defining aiki by negation ( "I was never told that," "That's not what I do," "I can't do that," etc.) is going to ever produce a definition of aiki. If you don't believe in aiki, why entertain the discussion? If you believe in aiki, why not set forth the aspects about which you feel strongly and build consensus component by component? Hell, I can buy a judo book that defines aiki - I am not saying it's right, but at least they're casting a marble.

Aiki age (and its corresponding partner aiki sage) are Japanese terms that I have heard through a number of sources. We have a permutation of the exercise in aikido, we call kokyu tanden ho and it contains both the rising and falling components of the exercise. I think at some point we have a burden to personally invest in education beyond what we get in the dojo and that possibly transcends arts. Just cause we don't know it doesn't mean it ain't true.

What Hisa Sensei taught at the Asahi Dojo was a bit different. Amatsu Sensei said he was never taught anything called aiki age from Hisa Sensei.

Gavin

Well, I understand that - I also understand that every line of Daito-ryu that I've seen or trained in uses the term, including people who pre-date Takuma Hisa, and other students of Takuma Hisa like Hakaru Mori. So what exactly is the point that you're trying to make?

I just dont think aiki is something you get more and more of. So when you say high level aiki I get the impression that you think it is something you keep building on?

If we were born with high-level ability, we wouldn't need to train, or have a reference like the Soden, would we? Heck, we can't even walk when we're born, let alone generate kuzushi on contact.

If you're saying that aiki in full bloom is inherent to the human condition -- as if we are born like light bulbs switched on but covered in opaque mud -- on what is that theory based? (Personally, I think we're all born with varying baselines of ability that must be developed into something martially effective).

And as a corollary, what is it then that allows, over time, a practitioner to more efficiently and fully scrape away the occlusion, and turn "muddy power" into "transparent power" (to borrow terminology from Sagawa-den Daito-ryu) and fully, efficiently express aiki in a manner that is martially effective?

I was under the impression that there was a time when the Takumakai didn't use names for techniques. I thought that Okabayashi---after spending some time training with Tokimune---brought technique names into the Takumakai along with the Hiden Mokuroku organizational scheme. (I believe the Soden isn't organized in any particular fashion.)

So while I really don't know, I wouldn't be surprised if the name "Aiki-age" came through Tokimune and not Hisa.

So while I really don't know, I wouldn't be surprised if the name "Aiki-age" came through Tokimune and not Hisa.

That may well be true. Sokaku wasn't much on names, and he only taught Takuma Hisa for a short time - 2-3 years, much of which he wasn't even there in Osaka. In any case, I'm not sure why it appears to have been a sticking point.

That may well be true. Sokaku wasn't much on names, and he only taught Takuma Hisa for a short time - 2-3 years, much of which he wasn't even there in Osaka. In any case, I'm not sure why it appears to have been a sticking point.

Best,

Chris

Hi,

Im not making any point. I just said in Takeda Ryu there is no such thing as aiki age/sage. Amatsu Sensei never taught me anything called aiki age. Im just saying my experience in training Daito Ryu thats all.

In Daito Ryu aiki is defined you dont need to cast any marbles, its no secret. You just have to go to a dojo and ask them. I cant speak for Mori Sensei but I dont think what you posted opposes anything I said?

Im not making any point. I just said in Takeda Ryu there is no such thing as aiki age/sage. Amatsu Sensei never taught me anything called aiki age. Im just saying my experience in training Daito Ryu thats all.

In Daito Ryu aiki is defined you dont need to cast any marbles, its no secret. You just have to go to a dojo and ask them. I cant speak for Mori Sensei but I dont think what you posted opposes anything I said?

Gavin

I've been in a number of Daito-ryu dojo, including a number of years with direct students of Takuma Hisa - but I would probably class my experience of people's willingness (and their ability to do so, even if willing) to share in a somewhat less positive light.

In any case, every Daito-ryu line that I've run across uses the term "aiki-age", including direct students of Takuma HIsa like Mori, so it is liketly to have come from some central source and the most likely source for that is Takeda himself, that's all. FWIW, some of the Sagawa students claim that Yukiyoshi Sagawa really invented the name, but I'm a little sceptical of that one as well.

as someone who does not practice Daitō ryū some of your comments raised some questions.
And as someone who understands Daitō ryū and Aikidō to be members of the same family I would appreciate very much, if you could help me, to get things clearer.

1. When you say that there are no throws in Daitō ryū, how does this relate to what Takeda Tokimune sensei states in an Interview: " ... in Daito-ryu do you learn to throw your enemy in five directions ... In gohonage, you throw your enemy in five directions--front, back, right and left and center--that is, ... There are also five-directional throws associated with ikkajo, nikajo, and sankajo. ..." (I did abridge this quote! Everybody please read the whole text of Takeda sensei, to get the context.)

2. When you state that there are no names for techniques in Daitō ryū, how does this relate to the book of Kondo Katsuyuki sensei, giving a clear name for every depicted technique?

I don't mean to start an argument about that!
It's just: I own that book. I read that Interview. And I would like to comprehend, i.e. to bring together what seems to be a contradiction.

Quote:

Oisin Bourke wrote:

Thanks for your post, Carsten. On this point, Would you say what you are doing is essentially the same?

As far as aiki is concerned: Yes, I think so. (To give an answer as short as possible ... )

I cant do any of the aikibudo waza as I have never been taught any. I only studied with Amatsu Sensei who only taught Hisa Sensei's Daito Ryu. But I will try and answer your question in the context of what I learned. I mainly got taught Takeda Ryu so sometimes I just refer to that as what I got taught i.e Daito Ryu. I should probably be more specific. In Ueshiba Ryu there are throw away waza like the type you are probably thinking of. So I have done some throw away waza, and it does feel good to throw the enemy away but I was always taught if you just throw the enemy away they will just come back. In Takeda Ryu there are no throws.

The Daito Ryu I learnt did not have any names for anything. I come from a Judo background and it was quite annoying at first as I wanted a name for everything. But after a while you just get over it and just train. Although sometimes Amatsu Sensei would make a joke and name a waza after someone, like I had a technique I really liked and he named it 'Gavins favourite waza', it wasn't a compliment by the way. Or a difficult waza became 'the waza that someone cant do'.

If I get you right, what I understood as contradictions is simply due to Daitō ryū having different lines of tradition/branche/ryū-ha that have names/no names for techniques and have throws/no throws in their curriculum.
Do I have this right?

In these settings IHTBF is of less use than what one might commonly assume. Your "feeling" is not normally attuned ...

I think, feeling (jap. kimochi, chin. qi) is what it's all about when it comes to aikidō.

I.e. aikidō practice - in my understanding - teaches or should teach "to get attuned to ...", to learn to feel, to develop a reliable feeling. And - most interesting - to learn to direct this feeling (kimochi/qi). Within one's own body - and via a contact/atari into the body of the attacker.